Charlie Maynard
MP for Witney · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) for securing this fantastic debate on an important issue, on which she spoke so well.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for securing this debate and for her excellent speech. Like all of us present, I find the dangerous misuse of e-bikes and e-scooters is being raised with me more and more.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Locally, Thames Valley police officers are finding and seizing bikes that are able to go 120 mph. The problem keeps growing. By some estimates, there are more than 1 million e-scooters in use across the country, with no standards for speed, brakes or batteries.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is happening in Witney and in other areas up and down the country. It is harsh and cruel. The numbers of people losing their jobs every week are not by accident, but by design.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. [ Laughter. ] The latest round of the sustainable farming incentive was a disaster for small farmers, including many in my constituency. They were counting on this money as a lifeline after another impossibly difficult year.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The way to fix that problem is by focusing on two things that the owner values most: stamp price rises and taking cash out of the Royal Mail business. Here are some ideas on how we could achieve that. First, as others have mentioned, there should be no stamp price rises until targets are met. We have to get that link absolutely firm.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
492 held · 472 searchable for Charlie Maynard. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“The OBR’s analysis makes it clear that any change of this kind would necessarily have to be applied across all of the workforce and could not be limited to higher earners, so the impact of these changes could indeed see lower pay rises or reduce base pay for employees who contribute less than £2,000. Secondly, the new analysis spells out that some employees may move to make standard pension contributions, including through relief at source schemes, thereby losing the NICs advantages of salary sacrifice and increasing their NICs bill, even if they contribute small amounts. Thirdly, OBR modelling shows that employers would pass down around three quarters of the additional NICs cost to employees, mainly through lower wages, which again would likely hit all workers regardless of the amount they save through salary sacrifice.”
House of Commons23 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree. It sends the wrong message and puts in place the wrong incentives, and that is a real problem. Ministers will have seen the analysis produced by the Office for Budget Responsibility in response to the former Lib Dem Pensions Minister, Steve Webb, highlighting the flaws in the Government’s claim that these changes will not impact most lower and middle earners—that is, those not saving more than the £2,000 threshold in any case. The OBR’s new analysis highlights three main ways that the Bill could affect the wider workforce. First, employers may move away from salary sacrifice altogether by increasing ordinary employer pension contributions in place of wage growth, all by reducing contractual pay in exchange for higher contributions.”
House of Commons23 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For example, delivery targets were not met in a single postcode across the first three quarters of 2025-26. In Oxfordshire, just 67.2% of first-class mail arrived, against the target of 93%. In October 2025, Ofcom fined Royal Mail £21 million, saying that it urgently needed an improvement plan. However, five months later Royal Mail is still saying that it cannot publish that plan until talks with the postal workers union—the CWU—conclude. All the while, our constituents and our posties are left paying more and suffering more for an inadequate and wholly unreliable service.”
House of Commons18 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That situation causes a huge amount of unhappiness, but there seems to be no end to it in sight, which is a real problem. The turnover rate of new Royal Mail employees is extremely high and the work practices are harsh. Yet we rely on our local posties, and almost without exception they take their responsibilities extremely seriously. I will give a particular shout out to my postie, Tony, who on Christmas eve worked way beyond his scheduled hours. He should not have had to do that and should have been paid for it. However, he is representative of everybody working for Royal Mail around the country, and that situation does not just happen on Christmas eve; it happens week in, week out. The work practices are just getting tougher and tougher. That comes out in the latest quarterly report, which makes for miserable reading.”
House of Commons18 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg, and I thank the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East (David Reed) for securing this important debate. I also thank my hon. Friends the Members for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor), for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) and for Yeovil (Adam Dance) for highlighting all the impacts on their constituents, in the form of missed medical appointments, financial appointments or legal appointments. Exactly the same is true in my Witney constituency. Obviously, I speak for the whole Chamber; we are all getting correspondence about this issue in our mailbox, because it is causing so much trouble. The other thing that has come out so strongly in this debate is the stress, the distrust and the unfairness that the posties themselves have to live with.”
House of Commons18 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am interested in the extent to which the Minister considers the situation similar to or different from the telecoms industry levy, which is used to fund the broadband universal service obligation. Does the Minister agree that insisting on much clearer operational transparency from the Royal Mail would be good to establish more detail on whether parcels are being prioritised over letters and the impact of that? It could be managed by Ofcom requiring root-level data on delivery performance and clear reporting on parcels versus letters prioritisation to make it harder for USO traffic to be quietly deprioritised. What steps is the Minister considering taking to stop a situation where Royal Mail keeps trying to bounce Ofcom into cutting the USO further?”
House of Commons18 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The new owner of Royal Mail is a commercial operator that bought International Distribution Services, the holding company of Royal Mail, in June 2025 with a full understanding of the Royal Mail’s USO requirement. The business seems to be prioritising its profitable parcel business, General Logistics Systems. The owner also has a clear commercial incentive to cut costs on the Royal Mail side of the business and to keep lobbying Ofcom to continue to loosen the USO requirements even further. Such a strategy serves the owner of Royal Mail very nicely, but is a terrible outcome for the many millions of people up and down the country who depend on the USO, and for the posties. I am sure the Minister and Ofcom recognise that predicament and also recognise that the USO is a key public good.”
House of Commons18 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have been here for 17 months. We could rehash things from 14 or 17 years ago. I believe that in 2009 the Labour Government sought to take a 30% stake out of the Royal Mail, but I am not interested in going back through that because we are where we are. Let me try to finish my speech, and I will talk about where I think we should be heading now. The Government and Ofcom need to urgently make it clear to Royal Mail executives that they must get a grip on the situation. Although letter numbers have fallen, there is still plenty of demand for Royal Mail’s delivery services. Crucially, everyone across the country and all of us here in Parliament place huge value on retaining the universal service obligation. What seems clear is that the incentives are wrong.”
House of Commons18 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the new legal adviser service as a first step towards levelling the horribly unequal access to legal services available to victims as compared with suspects. However, only £3 million has been provided a year for the next two years to fund that service. Given the record highs of more than 12,500 sexual offence cases awaiting trial in the Crown courts, including Oxfordshire’s Crown court that serves my Witney constituency, does the Minister believe that funding to be anywhere near enough?”
House of Commons17 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the worrying figures from the OBR suggest, continuing to freeze income tax thresholds will drag an extra 1 million pensioners into paying income tax for the first time by 2030-31, unless the Government act.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Bill, and the Budget it derives from, demonstrates clearly that the Chancellor has implemented stealth tax grabs that will hit some of the lowest paid the hardest, through extending a freeze on income tax thresholds and the national insurance contributions increases which suppress employment and wages. It is full of short-sighted harmful decisions that the Liberal Democrats cannot support. Our amendments aim to highlight and reduce some of its more harmful impacts. I will focus on four particular areas, the first of which is the impact of frozen income tax thresholds. New clauses 15 to 17 would secure additional information and analysis about their impact.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In new clause 13, we highlight the complexity of the tax system and the cost of administering it. There is a green brick sitting here masquerading as a Bill. With such a big majority in this Parliament, the Government have a real opportunity to do some serious thinking about how to simplify, root and branch, our tax code. It is disappointing that we see no sign of that actually happening. With this size of legislation being added each time, the tax system is getting bigger and more complex, and that puts a real burden on business. The Treasury Committee, the Public Accounts Committee and the Business and Trade Committee have all spoken out about how much damage our over-complex tax system is doing to our businesses. We would really appreciate anything that the Government can do and if they could get more serious about that.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Liberal Democrats have tabled new clause 14, which requires the Chancellor to review and report on the impact of the Bill on unemployment, with particular regard to young people aged 16 to 24. It is worth noting that this legislation, which dampens growth and hits jobs, comes at a time of broader disruption in the labour market. AI is already having a particular impact on entry level so-called white-collar jobs, but it is also having an impact in pubs. All our local pubs are hiring fewer young people because there is no incentive to do so any more. The creation of a new employers’ national insurance contribution band between £5,000 and £9,100, with a lower rate to incentivise employers to hire often younger, part-time workers, would really help.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We would really appreciate it if the Government explained to each of the 1.3 million people who will be impacted what it will do to them, because I do not think they are aware of it right now. That disproportionately impacts those on low incomes who will be dragged into income tax for the first time. At the very least, please provide that information. Next is the impact of the Government’s actions and inactions on youth unemployment, which is building to a real crisis point. Some 16% of all 16 to 24-year-olds are out of work, or almost 740,000 people, which is 100,000 up in the last year—I repeat, 100,000 up in the last year—so something is going wrong with the Government’s policies and we need to get to the bottom of that.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree. The stress of that is horrific, so the more it can function effectively would be appreciated. The Government have said that people whose only source of income is the state pension will not pay any income tax over this Parliament, but no details have been provided on how they will be protected. I ask the Government to put an end to the uncertainty and set out plans in full explaining exactly how they intend to shield pensioners from that unfair tax hit. We would love a timeline for when they will do that. More broadly, extending the stealth tax by two more years will drag an estimated 1.3 million people into a higher tax band by 2029-30: just over 600,000 into the basic rate of tax and just under 700,000 into the higher rate. Those are big numbers.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for speaking up on this matter. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) feels very strongly about it as well. We do not really understand why the Government have decided to go with those fixed static thresholds. Everybody recognises that agricultural land values go up and that the cost of living goes up. We would really appreciate it if the Government could explain why they have decided not to index that. We will therefore be pushing new clause 11 to a vote, because we really want to see that fixed.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the hon. and learned Gentleman please remind the House what last year’s growth rate was for Northern Ireland compared with for the whole UK? I think it might have been three times higher.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I ask the Government to provide more detail, and quickly, on their plans to prevent pensioners from being dragged into paying income tax; to publish information on how the freezing of tax thresholds until 2030-31 impacts households at various income levels; to recognise the impact that the Government’s policies are having on youth unemployment, which is up by 100,000 in the last year, and to take steps to halt this rapid rise, which at a minimum would include reducing the national insurance contributions rate paid by employers on part-time employees earning between £5,000 and £9,100 per year; and, finally, as per new clause 11, which we just pushed to a vote, to look again at taking a fairer approach to farmers by allowing the thresholds on agricultural property relief to rise over time in line with agricultural land prices, rather than having those thresholds eroded over time.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I speak on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, and the shadow Minister’s audacity in talking about a “high-tax, low-growth doom loop” is pretty high. With regard to this Bill, I ask the Government to look again at four things. I will go through them quickly, and then I will sit down.”
House of Commons11 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That hinges on getting growth back into our economy, not pencilling in unfair tax rises in a last-minute fashion at the end of the forecast period just to stick to the letter of the fiscal rules. However, until the Government grasp the nettle on much more fundamental reform of our Budget process, I do not think that will be achieved, and more critically, I do not think the dial will move on economic growth or market confidence.”
House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The fact that Sweden has seen years of strong growth and high living standards, and that its debt has now dropped from 80% to 30% of GDP, is a positive endorsement of this approach. The reality is that incredibly important choices are made as part of the Budget process. These choices impact the day-to-day life of each of our constituents, whether in Witney or any of the constituencies that the Members here all represent. The people have a right to have the fullest possible picture of how the Government are going about setting their taxes, spending their money and managing the economic picture, and this step will not achieve that alone. The Government need to foster stability and manage the public finances responsibly.”
House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The current situation, in which we have months and months of speculation and then approve hundreds of billions of pounds of Government tax and spending with just a few hours of debate, with no one permitted to see what the Chancellor is proposing in the Budget until it is announced as a fait accompli in Parliament, is exceptional by international standards and a key source of uncertainty and instability. If the Government truly want to improve market confidence, this is where they should be looking to make reforms. For example, we could look at Sweden, which, following a budget crisis in the early 1990s and soaring debt, introduced proper parliamentary debate of the Government’s budget, with alternatives offered and amendments made before it is finalised, before getting a subsequent period of scrutiny and accountability.”
House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I will not burden the House with too long a speech. There are a lot of issues with the Government’s and the country’s economic policymaking process, but there are good arguments for reducing the number of fiscal events, which create artificial cliff edges. However, I note the concerns, including from the IFS, that this looks like a way to reduce scrutiny of the Government’s economic record. Fundamentally, if we are serious about the responsible management of the public finances, tackling our high levels of debt and getting our economy growing again, I am most interested in how we scrutinise our Government’s tax and spending plans.”
House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, our rural communities are certainly wary, and measures such as the family farm tax and the sustainable farming incentive have really hurt them, so I urge the Government to go very carefully. I want to avoid any narratives of this elite or that elite pushing things down on people; that does not do us any good. We all need to stay away from such a narrative, and taking this issue on its merits would really serve us all well.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is an excellent candidate to be consolidated and run as one unified, well-resourced, digitised system that allows people to get recertified quickly and effectively. I recommend that we head in that direction as quickly as possible, rather than in the direction of the proposal under discussion. I am still relatively new to this House, but one of the reasons we are all here is to serve our constituents well. We want to keep the temperature of debate low, because situations such as this, where people have died, matter. If we ramp up the temperature, I do not think we are serving ourselves or our communities well. These are serious issues, and they deserve a serious debate.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Every death is one too many—I get that—but we must also highlight where the licensing is or is not working, as well as the changes that came in last August. What happened in August 2025? New checks were brought in and changes were made to the references system. For example, the number of referees required increased from one to two, anyone connected with domestic abuse or violence can no longer be licensed and other medical checks were introduced. Those new changes are only six months old, so it is important that we see how they land and their impact—hopefully a very positive impact—before we take further steps. As many Members have said, the firearms licensing system, with the 43 licensing authorities, is a mess.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Obviously there was a mix; I grew up with shotguns and I am still a shotgun owner and certificate holder, but not a firearm holder, and I had not understood in detail section 1 versus section 2. As I looked into that, my thought was, “Holy smokes, this is going to change rural life enormously if it goes through.” That gave me the heebie-jeebies—it led to two hours of internet research and an email to my spokesperson to say, “Let’s get on top of this fast, if we’re not already.” The consequences of this proposal will be enormous and very damaging. Various Members have come to the debate with a great deal of knowledge, and some have attacked the stats on the number of people who have been killed.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) for introducing this important debate so well and with such balance—I really appreciate it. I am proud and relieved that we live in a country with some of the strictest gun laws in the world. Obviously a painful history that got us to that point, but it is something we are fortunate to have. As my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) mentioned, there are many places that have much worse laws than we do. In December, emails began flooding in to my inbox on this issue. For some reason, one Saturday morning at about 5.30 am I found myself awake and wanting to dig into the issue on the internet. I dug into the murders that had happened, how they had happened and what had gone on.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The headline from that report was that the number of people living in very deep poverty is at the highest level in more than 30 years, based on 2023-24 figures. The Government must now make it an absolute priority to address that, which is why we are calling on them to look at the much wider issues of overall levels of child poverty, destitution and deep poverty among households with children, as well as at educational outcomes and physical and mental health outcomes for children in households affected by poverty. They need to thoroughly assess those a year after the passage of this Bill and report back to the House on its impact.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I commend the Labour MPs who lost the Whip for fighting to end this policy for their courage. I am sure that their voices and actions have played a large part in the Government now bringing forward this Bill. However, the Bill is very narrow in scope, and we should recognise that it is only one step towards tackling child poverty. There is much more we need to do, as highlighted by new clause 3, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Torbay (Steve Darling). Ministers will no doubt have seen the report published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation that, while welcoming the decision to lift the cap, warned that progress on tackling child poverty as a result of removing the two-child benefit cap is likely to stall after April—two months away—unless it is supported by further follow-up measures.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This change will be worth up to £5,000 per year for each of the more than 500 families in my constituency who have been impacted by the cap. I have had heartbreaking emails from and surgeries with constituents impacted by this cap, as I am sure we all have. They have had to skip meals to ensure their children do not go without, because each month their money simply does not stretch far enough. Our food banks help enormously, but relying on them is obviously not the solution. Too many children and families have been trapped in poverty because of the previous decision to impose the cap and this Government’s stubborn decision to keep it until now. I wish this change had happened a year ago, which would have saved a lot of trouble and stress for families and children involved, as well as for a few Members in this Chamber.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It has been a very painful path to get to this point, but I simply want to welcome what the Government are bringing in. Reversing the decision on the two-child limit will lift 540,000 children out of absolute poverty, and it is unquestionably the right thing to do—certainly for those children and for their families, but also for our economy, our public services and our society as a whole. Children growing up in poverty face worse educational outcomes, poorer physical and mental health, and fewer opportunities in adulthood. As the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) pointed out, this has a huge economic cost on our society, and investing a relatively small amount now for great gains later is very sensible.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yes, I am. I congratulate the Chair and members of the Work and Pensions Committee on doing all that good work; many thanks to them. Assessing the wider issues may encourage the Government to take steps beyond this welcome but narrow Bill to support children and their families who are struggling to get by from week to week. Those include auto-enrolment of all those eligible for free school meals, so that children are automatically considered eligible when their parents apply for relevant benefits or financial support, and giving people the ability to juggle caring responsibilities alongside work without falling into hardship by increasing the value of carer benefits, particularly for those on low incomes.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have repeatedly asked Ministers to explain, in the main Chamber, in the Business and Trade Committee, in this Chamber and in the press, why they believe that the class A creditor consortium does not meet the ultimate controller test. I have received either no answer— most recently from the Minister three weeks ago, when she refused point-blank to give me an answer in the main Chamber—or obfuscation. Please, will the Minister now answer the question? Does she consider the London & Valley Water consortium to meet the ultimate controller test with regard to its material influence over Thames Water, and if not, why not?”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clearly, the consortium more than meets that definition as it is, in effect, the only significant party left standing across either Thames Water’s debt or equity structure. As per the regulation, Thames Water must inform Ofwat even of potential changes in its ultimate controllers. Ofwat then requires water companies to obtain legally enforceable undertakings from each of their ultimate controllers. That has not happened in the case of the class A creditors, and I believe this is a rig-up between the Treasury, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Ofwat, Thames Water and the class A creditors. That is not good enough. It is in contravention of our regulations.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, that will work only if Ofwat is doing its job properly and recognising companies as ultimate controllers. As the Minister knows, the equity of Thames Water is now zero, with most of the investors having written down their equity investment in full, and some having taken away their board representation nearly two years ago. That leaves the debt holders—the class A creditors—holding the majority of the company’s debt. They have now set up the London & Valley Water consortium to co-ordinate their interests. The water sector is a regulated sector, with the ultimate controller designation being critical. To meet that definition, an entity only has to “materially influence the policy or affairs” of Thames Water. There is no limit on how many entities meet that criterion or whether there are equity or debt holders.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello). I am going to move very quickly. I thank Sir Jon Cunliffe and all the campaigners in my constituency. I note that Blake primary school had to close on Friday because of sewage—the fourth time in the last two and a half months. Bills have gone up: we are paying 9.75% interest with Thames Water. I thank Alex Lipp and Jonny Dawe for putting together sewagemap.co.uk—a fantastic website that tracks what is going on and where. The “ultimate controller” definition is mentioned 16 times in the Independent Water Commission’s final report. I welcome the proposal in paragraph 700, which would allow an enforceable undertaking against ultimate controllers.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests regarding the business that I founded in 1996, BDA partners, in which I still hold a stake but have no role or responsibility. Economically, this agreement offers some benefits. As per the Government’s impact assessment, and as the Minister stated, the UK’s gross domestic product is estimated to increase by 0.13% as a result of this FTA. That is equivalent to £4.8 billion. That is in the long run— 0.13% by 2040. Let us put that into context: the hit to our economy from Brexit is around 6% to 8% of GDP—in the region of £210 billion—so its impact is 44 times larger. That is now, compared with the 0.13% we get in 15 years’ time.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I certainly like the States. While we are making comparisons with Europe, I note that under the UK’s free trade agreement 92% of our exports to India will enter tariff-free. Under the EU’s deal, 96.6% of its exports can enter India tariff-free. Perhaps there is some logic, after all, to bigger trade blocs having more leverage. I wholeheartedly agree with the comments from the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith) about national insurance contributions. I am also deeply concerned about that, as is my party. I also take the Minister’s point about visa fees and everything else, but by the time we add all those together, I think that UK Inc—whether in my constituency of Witney or across the UK—will still be at a major disadvantage. This risks undermining British labour—”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thirdly, does the planned ban cover petrochemicals imported from India and other third countries derived from either oil or gas? Fourthly, please will the Minister tell us the specific date on which the ban will come into force, what steps will be required to effect it and what the timeline is for each of those steps? Finally, what are the reasons for the delay in implementing the ban? Why have the Government not already closed the loophole?”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Four of the five largest oil refiners in India are majority-owned by the Indian Government, with Reliance being the fifth, so it is not just the Indian refiners that are helping Russia by selling us petchems; the state of India itself is right now selling jet fuel and other petrochemicals derived from Russian oil and gas into the UK. What have we done about it? We have signed a free trade agreement with India. To add insult to injury, the loophole to be closed, as far as I can tell, just covers oil derivatives, but petrochemicals are derived from natural gas, too. What is happening with those? I have five questions for the Minister. First, what is his justification for signing an FTA with a country that is helping Russia to breach its sanctions? Secondly, was this issue discussed in the FTA negotiations?”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The refining loophole is still there because His Majesty’s Government have not yet legislated to ban imports of derivatives from Russian crude. The Government say that they expect a ban to be enforced in spring 2026, whenever that is. Analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air shows that between the ban on direct imports coming into force in 2022 and the end of 2025, the UK has imported £4 billion-worth of jet fuel and other oil products made at refineries in India and Turkey, which run partially on Russian crude, and that every month the UK delays banning oil products made from Russian crude, it is effectively writing the Kremlin a cheque for around £44 million. It gets worse.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That included India’s Nayara Energy, which is part-owned by Russia’s state oil company Rosneft. On 2 December 2025, the Trade Minister told the Business and Trade Committee, of which I am a member, “we want India to do less business with Russia because we want Russia’s machine to be debilitated. There are lots of things that I want to achieve in the world and not all of them can be achieved through FTAs.” The Trade Minister and the trade team fully understood, therefore, that India was, and is, selling Russia-originated petchems into the UK. We had leverage when we were negotiating the FTA, but instead the UK decided to turn a blind eye to India’s sanction-busting, helping Russia’s war effort. This continues right now, with the UK importing jet fuel and other petrochemicals from India that are manufactured with Russian oil and gas.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to ask some question about India’s role in busting the trade sanctions that the UK has put on Russia. To recap: Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, and both the UK and the EU banned direct imports of Russian oil and petroleum products in December 2022. However, a loophole stayed open that allowed derivative products including petrochemicals imported from third countries into the UK to continue using Russian-origin crude oil and gas. In July 2025, the EU amended its sanctions legislation to target imports of petrochemicals from third countries that used Russian-origin oil. This has now taken effect in the EU. The EU has blocked this loophole. In October 2025, the UK announced a further sanctions package targeting specific third-country entities that supported Russian fossil fuels.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I really hope I am wrong, but I don’t think I am. Moving beyond the numbers, I highlight the concerns of civil society groups, which many Members have mentioned, about clauses in the agreement on labour, the environment and human rights being characterised by a pattern of aspirational language and a lack of enforceability, with the result that they are not subject to the dispute settlement mechanism—cute words but no teeth. The Liberal Democrats have long called for a set of minimum standards to benchmark future trade agreements, which would include human rights, conflict and oppression and environmental, labour and safety standards, where they can be negotiated, based on a UK trade and human rights policy and a trade and development policy.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It often pushes families to seek treatment abroad, where clinicians have greater freedom to investigate novel therapies. A lack of accessible, up-to-date information is contributing to missed opportunities to partake in research. Although some registries exist, such as the National Institute for Health and Care Research’s “Be Part of Research”, they are often difficult to navigate—there are over 120 types of brain tumour to search for—and they quickly become outdated. The cancer plan states: “We will make increasing research into rare cancers a priority for DHSC”— the Department of Health and Social Care— “and NIHR (with the support and oversight of our new national lead for rare cancers research).” I would welcome the Minister providing further details on how he and his team plan to effect that.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We need new diagnostic tools, research into biomarkers, and targeted therapies to achieve any major changes to survival.” What we need on the back of the plan is a comprehensive, actionable strategy, with specific, measurable goals and targets, each with clear deadlines, so that we can ensure accountability in critical areas such as workforce recruitment and retention, infrastructure development, and incentives for pharmaceutical companies to develop drugs for cancers on which so little progress has been made. I get that the Minister has just published a plan, but I look to him to take this further and set out as concrete a set of goals as possible, with a clear timeline. I will go through a few headings. On participation and research, the regulatory landscape is too restrictive.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“People do not believe that they will be able to change that situation; they are not spending any money on them, because they are really difficult. There is no point pretending that these cancers are not really difficult, and brain cancer is particularly difficult because of the blood-brain barrier. The body does everything it can to stop things getting into the brain, which is mostly good for us, but when it comes to treating a brain tumour, it is bad for us. I am grateful for the national cancer plan, but we need more, and we should be taking steps to deal with that issue. The plan says: “Some rare cancers, such as brain and pancreatic cancer, have stubbornly low survival rates—and few treatment or diagnostic breakthroughs.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Those of us affected by brain cancer do anger quite effectively, and she has withheld it, despite having her own cross to bear. She has worked extremely hard in this area, and I am very grateful to her for that. I am not going to rehash all the points that the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden made so well, but we obviously have some very bad issues. Pinned in front of me in my office is a chart, with arrows going from left to right, which basically shows how survival rates for different cancers have changed over the last 40 years. Up at the top, there are testicular cancer and thyroid cancer, and down at the bottom left, with virtually no arrows, are pancreatic, brain, oesophagus and a number of other cancers.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“She has been brave as hell and utterly determined, and is up there with the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden. Like her, Georgie takes no prisoners. She has gathered people to her cause and has never taken no for an answer. That is obviously to her credit, but more importantly, it has made a difference to this debate. Well done, Georgie. I also give a shout-out to the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), whose Rare Cancers Bill has made a real difference, and to Labour Front Benchers. I know that I am on the Opposition Benches, but I do not really care, because this issue is too important for us to mess around. I do not know about the Secretary of State, but I think he is interested. I do know about the Minister for cancer, who has her own story, and who stood up in front of a room of angry people.”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗